fOR IN-DEPTH INDIVIDUAL STUDY

book of the month

Here's what I'm reading right now and a nice outline for you!

isn't everything
true, for someone?

Everything is Just Relative, right?

The Objection: How can you claim that
Christianity is the only way?! How can you say that someone
is wrong? Everyone has the right to decide for themselves
what is right or wrong! You're being intolerant and hateful
when you say your way is the only way, because "Everything Is
Relative".

What Are Some Of The Ways That We See Relativism Every Day?

"You can't impose your morals on me"! The
person saying this is clearly an imposing moral judgment isn't
he! In addition, all societal laws impose a moral
requirement, according to the perspective of the lawgiver. So
the right question is not 'are morals neutral?' but instead 'what
morals are right or true'?

"You should not be judgmental"! Sometimes
it seems that the non-believer's favorite Bible verse seems to be
'Judge not lest ye be judged"! But similar to the mis-logic
of the moral neutrality claim, the non-judgmental claim is itself a
claim that passes judgment! The logic trend we are seeing is
grounded in a specific issue: That these claims of neutrality
are 'unlivable'.

"You Are Being Intolerant"! "Tolerance"
seems to be one of the dogma's of current Western social philosophy
(aka religion). Violate this maxim at your own peril -
because the disciples of 'tolerance' will certainly be intolerant of
your view! The problem is, popular culture has misunderstood
the concept and definition of tolerance. According to
Webster, tolerance is defined as "to recognize and respect without
necessarily agreeing to sympathizing". In other words, by
definition a person is in disagreement with another's view, if they are
going to be 'tolerant'. But today, tolerance has been
redefined essentially as 'acceptance'. Clearly, this
adjustment of definition has been accomplished to confuse an honorable
condition (tolerance) for one that is logically impossible (acceptance
of all terms.)

Some Of The Problems With Relativism

No One Is Right, No One Is Wrong - Are we ready to acknowledge that
Abraham Lincoln and the Union was wrong about trying to abolish
slavery? Is the earth round or not? Were the civil
reformers in the 1960's right or not? The society cannot
dictate, because if it is allowed to, no one could say that the Nazi's
were wrong! Are we ready to live with that?

Relativists Cannot Preach 'Tolerance' - What is the first thing a
relativist says when they discuss morality with someone who does not
agree with them? They claim they are wrong (thus violating
their misguided definition of tolerance!)

Relativists Cannot Cry Foul - Steal their car, and the average
relativist will declare that you did something wrong!
Personal definition of morality is up to the person making it, so get
ready for the person to say that stealing the car fits within his own
personal morality! Claiming that he broke the law is
illogical, since he may disagree with that which the society has
determined is moral!

The Requirement For Objective Truth - Is there something that is
'right' or 'true', no matter what and no matter when and no matter
who? There must be! Otherwise we are not honest
with ourselves. The 'unlivability' mentioned above refers to
the concept that the people making these claims simply can't follow
through on them; they can't live the way that they claim; they say it
but they can't do it! Indeed, as it has been said, "If there
is no truth, that's a great reason to tolerate no one!"

Indeed, it is intuitive that there must be Objective Truth.
The logic above indicates this, as well as all the other illogical
results of subjectivism. It is obvious to us,
naturally. It is required to live without contradicting
ourselves. Don't agree? How do we know the from the
following example: There are no square circles. How do we
know this? We just know! These are rational
intuitions (according to Koukl). Just as there are rational
intuitions, there are moral intuitions, which can be known (for
example: rape is wrong). In short, if we want to talk like we
live, we must believe in Objective Truth. The only question
that remains, is: "What is the Objective Truth?"

How Are We To Find Out What Is 'True'?

Is it by the law, or by what society wants? No.
That would simply implement a system of 'those in power make the laws',
also known as 'might makes right'. Most people (except those
in power) would intuitively agree that this is 'wrong', or at least
clearly undesirable (think of the Nazi regime, and what was 'legal' in
that society!)

Is it by what I like? No. This is the most
prevalent kind of relativism. But my definition is clearly
not going to be everyone's definition, and would be based upon what I
want, and are subject to change. Clearly not objective, if it
is subject to change. In reality, we see that people are
generally just trying to get 'their way', and use subjectivity to claim
their prize. In short, this is nothing more than selfishness!

There must be an 'external benchmark', for there to be something to
compare against, in order to determine if something is
'true'. Morals are not something we can touch or
measure - and they are part of all of us - any person at any time in
the history of the world. There must be something immaterial,
also known as super-natural. This is what places Objective Truth
squarely in the realm of the spiritual, and provides another rational
reason to believe (have faith in) Christianity.

Finally, Jesus claimed to be the 'Truth'. What does this mean
practically? It means that Jesus, as the Creator and
Sovereign of all creation, is the source and meaning of all things that
are True. It means that anything that is True is based in His
will and desire, and that we are accountable to Him solely and surely.